Lucy Letby appeal

[GonnaGetGoingReturns]

Sorry if not allowed to discuss here but just seem that this vile creature plans to appeal against her original sentence as per yesterday’s news. Her defence team is leading this potential appeal.

WTAF?!

They haven’t reached a verdict on is it 6 or 7 poor other little babies who died and she’s suspected, I thought?

So sad for the poor parents and babies still.

Why not? It is by Cheshire Police and will answer a lot of the questions you have.

Well at worst it's human error on the part of the dr requesting them.

Can you really not contemplate why a dr might be hesitant in calling a pm unless he or she thinks they are absolutely necessary at the time? They are so distressing to already bereaved families, I know so because my father had to have one after his death.

My take is that it was after the pattern emerged that it was clear that pm's would have been better, that is in hindsight. It is absurd to think that until the pattern emerged the dr would have thought there could be a baby murderer on the uit.

Why on earth not? It’s first hand from Cheshire police.

Because they were just routine PMs at the time. No one was looking for anything. They were just tragic deaths.

it was only later when medical experts looked across a number of suspicious deaths and “near misses” - and looked for patterns that experts began looking for and seeing evidence for the various actual causes of death - air embolism - insulin poisoning and so on.

But that makes no sense regarding the timelines when already suspicions, allegedly, were being made about Letby.

How much later were the PMs - post-mortems - assessed? This is essential. Was it after she was charged, or when she was first arrested?

Why did the doctor, who cannot be named for legal reasons, apologise to the parents in court?

It says quite clearly on that link you posted, Dr apologises to parents for no post mortem

Why did the doctor, who cannot be named for legal reasons, apologise to the parents in court?

Because she regretted the fact that she hadn't ordered a post mortem.

You are under no obligation to educate yourself.

So don't if you don't want to.

'Mr Myers said: “But at the time you were questioning NEC and at the time you didn’t have an obvious explanation?”
The doctor replied: “I completely agree with hindsight. I should have requested a post-mortem. I was keen to avoid that, to avoid any distress.”
She turned to Child E’s parents and said: “I apologise to them that I didn’t push for that.”
Mr Myers suggested: “You, in effect, steered them away from a post-mortem?”
The witness said: “I don’t believe that was the case.”
On Monday, Child E’s mother told jurors the doctor told them a post-mortem “would not tell us very much”.
She said she and her husband decided not to ask for one “largely” because it was explained to them there was “little point”.'

The parents were told by the parents that there was little point in going for a post mortem.

Why the change of mind and when did the change of mind take place?

Back to the insults of 'you're thick' and educate yourself.

It's clearly a video outlining why and how the case was brought to court. I've read the newspapers daily reporting, the Judge's summary and the post verdict summary.

This thread is about an appeal. How might that appeal go ahead. IF GRANTED.

It brings to mind those who argue that Russell Brand is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

Obviously the CPS with the help of the Police have to put a prosecution case together and presume before the trial, if the defendant pleads not guilty, guilt in order to prove guilt.

Letby was arrested for the 3rd time and charged in November 2020, and then held in remand for two years. Two years to gather evidence before the charge.

The court case began in October 22 and ended with a guilty verdict in August 23. Two further years to gather evidence after the charge and remand.

All I'm asking is when the post-mortems were changed from the original. Because it took over 4 years to gather the evidence.

Eh?

The people insisting on defending someone who's been credibly accused of multiple rapes are the same ones defending a convicted child murderer.

Letby has been convicted, yet people are still insisting that she's innocent.

I haven't said Letby is innocent. Plus I was pointing out that there are many, not me, who defend Brand with the 'innocent until proven guilty'. Brand has obviously taken the Letby approach and claimed innocence.

Merely pointing out time lines and legalities which you obviously don't understand @TheGhostofLoganRoy

I'm not sure that the post mortems were changed? Isn't it the case that a conclusion has been reached as a result of a multiplicity of evidence that the decisions made about cause of death were erroneous?

Out of curiosity, why so sniffy about YouTube videos, @placemats?

Brand of course @ZadocPDederick

I want to be able to access the video on the Cheshire police website.

So the post-mortems remain the same?

As is pretty common, the video is directly linked from the relevant page on the Cheshire Police website -

Ihttps://www.cheshire.police.uk/police-forces/cheshire-constabulary/areas/cheshire/about-us/about-us/operation-hummingbird/

Placemats** I didn't call you "thick". You said that yourself.

Nor did I call you uneducated or that you should educate yourself.

I simply said you had no obligation to watch a you tube video you don't watch to watch to educate yourself on operation hummingbird.

Your reaction says far more about you then me 🤷‍♀️

But hey when someone posts a link to something to watch that explains how the investigation was conducted that covers all this you send a snippy reply. 🙄

"The green note was written when she had just been investigated by the Police"

I said investigated, not arrested.

I think you did. **

@itsgettingweird

Now I'm being snippy.

If you wish to criticise me can you be less personal?

The post-mortem reports won't be evidence (unless there is some unusual law in England.)

The facts that the post-mortems were based on are evidence, together with any relevant facts that were uncovered afterwards and not considered when the reports were being prepared.

Perhaps better to leave this thread for a while, some unpleasant individuals seem to think they own the thread and all opinions.

I wasn't being personal.

You asked a question and someone posted a video that answered them all.

You posted a snippy "I'm not watching a you tube video" in response to someone taking the time to post it.

So I responded that you have no obligation to. You wanted answers but if you don't want to watch a video that educates you as to those questions then don't. But daft to then get offended by people saying it's your choice.

I swear people come on these threads with the pure intent on arguing rather than having an actual adult discussion 🙄